On Feb 22, 2007, at 2:35 PM, Nat Echols wrote:
> I take it you're only interested in well-characterized and well-
> known proteins?
Actually no -- well-characterized is good, but well-known is
unnecessary.
> I have a receiver domain that expresses at >100mg/L and forms
> crystals right out of most screens that diffract to atomic/
> subatomic resolution, but it's still being functionally
> characterized and the system it's a part of is of limited interest
> outside of a specific field of microbiology. Experimentally,
> though, I can't imagine an easier protein to work with.
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Douglas L. Theobald wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to pick the collective brain of crystallographers on this
>> list -- what are some of the most easily crystallizable proteins?
>> I'm especially interested in those that over-express and diffract
>> well, and in ones that might be less well-known than, say,
>> lysozyme (but nearly as nice).
>>
>> Douglas
>>
>>
>>
>> ^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`^`
>> Douglas L. Theobald
>> Department of Biochemistry
>> Brandeis University
>> Waltham, MA 02454-9110
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> ^\
>> /` /^. / /\
>> / / /`/ / . /`
>> / / ' '
>> '
|